W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Next teleconference : 6th June

From: Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 10:47:36 +0200
To: "olivier Thereaux" <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>
Cc: Philip J├Ągenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, "Thierry MICHEL" <tmichel@w3.org>, "Audio Working Group" <public-audio@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.wfdepmp6m77heq@mage-desktop>
Den 2012-06-01 20:13:51 skrev Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>:

> Hi, folks-
>
> On 6/1/12 11:17 AM, olivier Thereaux wrote:
>> Philip,
>>
>> On 1 Jun 2012, at 15:41, Philip J├Ągenstedt wrote:
>>> We're not able to attend weekly teleconferences at this hour.
>>
>> We are not talking about a weekly teleconference, but a short series
>> to cover the most difficult issues.
>>
>>> Of the 8 issues of the agenda [1] we only covered 1, but that is
>>> still being discussed on the mailing list. While some things are
>>> easier to clear up via phone, it really seems wise to only use
>>> teleconference time for things where we've failed to reach
>>> agreement on the list, where all issues can be discussed in
>>> parallel.
>>
>> If I were cynical I could have picked 10 of the editorial/typo issues
>> and claim that calls are awesomely efficient. But as Chris mentioned
>> on the call, we picked the most difficult of the list, and managed to
>> reached a tentative resolution in 30 minutes or so.
>>
>> True not everyone could be on the call and as a result the
>> discussions are still ongoing, but it is undeniable that the call
>> helped us make progress in a way that two weeks of back-and-forths on
>> the list certainly wouldn't.
>
> I strongly agree with Olivier here.  Teleconference are very useful, and  
> it's only an hour a week.
>
> Telcons are good not only for the high-bandwidth, back-and-forth  
> technical discussion and nuance that email doesn't capture well, but  
> also for the socialization of a group, helping resolve tensions, and in  
> building consensus. (Not as good as F2Fs, but far cheaper.)  We're not  
> just trying to create a specification here, but trying to build a group  
> that can work together efficiently.

I agree with both of you. I also think teleconferences are useful (and I  
quite liked the last one), and I don't mind meeting up over phone every  
now and then. However, the problem is that it's literally impossible to  
meet during work hours (due to the different geographical locations of the  
WG participants), which I'm not very comfortable with.

Also, since I think that there will be more "difficult" issues to discuss  
(e.g. ISSUE-6, ISSUE-28, ISSUE-56, ISSUE-74, ISSUE-107 to name a few), I  
can easily see this going on on a weekly basis for months to come.

In other words, I think it would be very valuable if we could resolve as  
many issues as possible without teleconferences (and possibly a bug  
tracker would make that work easier).

Now, to a more practical issue: it just occurred to me that the 6th is a  
national holiday in Sweden [1], so neither me or Philip will be able to  
join this week.

Regards,

   Marcus


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day_of_Sweden
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 08:50:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 June 2012 08:50:23 GMT